Listar pagamentos Pix agendados do Open Finance

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

Annotations already declare read-only and idempotent hints. The description adds that it does not alter payments, which aligns with annotations. No additional behavior beyond annotations is disclosed, but no contradiction.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is two sentences with no extraneous information. The core action and purpose are front-loaded, achieving maximum conciseness.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given the complex input schema with two alternatives and many optional fields, the description lacks details on listing modes, pagination, and output. It is adequate but not thorough for a tool of this complexity.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 100% with parameter descriptions. The tool description mentions 'período e filtros' which hints at the date range and optional filters, but does not explain the two alternative required parameter groups (by identifier vs. by date range). Value added is marginal.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states the tool lists scheduled Pix payments via Open Finance, specifying the resource and scope. The verb 'Lista' matches the tool name, and it distinguishes from siblings like 'of_list_automatic_pix_payment' by focusing on scheduled payments.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description advises using the tool to track authorization, scheduling, and execution without modification, providing clear context. However, it does not explicitly mention when to avoid this tool or suggest alternatives among siblings.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.